The language of the future is Lisp. always has been, always will be. (which is a shame, because APL and its children J and K would be a better foundation).
The array model fits the relational model way, way better than the object oriented model (no "o/r impedance mismatch"). I think most domains fit just as well (if not better) with arrays.
And specifically, the APL/K/J focus on data makes it a better foundation for optimization, parallelization and reasoning about program behaviour.
>And specifically, the APL/K/J focus on data makes it a better foundation for optimization, parallelization and reasoning about program behaviour.
I'll give you the first two points (though some heavy-weight optimizations become necessary to eliminate big wasteful temporaries), but certainly not the last. At least not in general--- recursion is a terrible pain with arrays! Even stateful object-oriented languages deal with inductive structures better than array languages.
What does tree processing in APL look like? I'm it's possible and I'm also sure it's hell. The K/Q approach of nested vectors is a first step towards making recursion tolerable in an array language, but it's still a kludge.
